Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake

Abstract

Objective:

To investigate the magnitude and relative contribution of different sources of measurement errors present in the estimation of food intake via the 24-h recall technique.

Design:

We applied variance decomposition methods to the difference between data obtained from the USDA's Automated Multiple Pass Method (AMPM) 24-h recall technique and measured food intake (MFI) from a 16-week cafeteria-style feeding study. The average and the variance of biases, defined as the difference between AMPM and MFI, were analyzed by macronutrient content, subject and nine categories of foods.

Subjects:

Twelve healthy, lean men (age, 39±9 year; weight, 79.9±8.3 kg; and BMI, 24.1±1.4 kg/m2).

Results:

Mean food intakes for AMPM and MFI were not significantly different (no overall bias), but within-subject differences for energy (EI), protein, fat and carbohydrate intakes were 14, 18, 23 and 15% of daily intake, respectively. Mass (incorrect portion size) and deletion (subject did not report foods eaten) errors were each responsible for about one-third of the total error. Vegetables constituted 8% of EI but represented >25% of the error across macronutrients, whereas grains that contributed 32% of EI contributed only 12% of the error across macronutrients.

Conclusions:

Although the major sources of reporting error were mass and deletion errors, individual subjects differed widely in the magnitude and types of errors they made.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barnard J, Tapsell L, Davies P, Brenninger V, Storlien L (2002). Relationship between high energy expenditure and variation in dietary intake with reporting accuracy on 7 day food records and diet histories in a group of healthy adult volunteers. Eur J Clin Nutr 56, 358–367.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bellach B, Kohlmeier L (1998). Energy adjustment does not control for differential bias in nutritional epidemiology. J Clin Epidemiol 51, 395–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham S (1994). The use of 24-h urine samples and energy expenditure to validate dietary assessments. Am J Clin Nutr 59, 227S–231S.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Black A, Cole T (2000). Within- and between-subject variation in energy expenditure measured by the doubly-labelled water technique: implications for validating reported dietary energy intake. Eur J Clin Nutr 54, 386–394.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Black A, Goldberg G, Jebb S, Livingstone M, Cole T, Prentice A (1991). Critical evaluation of energy intake data using fundamental principles of energy physiology: 2. Evaluating the results of published surveys. Eur J Clin Nutr 45, 583–599.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conway JM, Ingwersen LA, Moshfegh AJ (2004). Accuracy of dietary recall using the USDA five-step multiple-pass method in men: an observational validation study. J Am Diet Assoc 104, 595–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway JM, Ingwersen LA, Vinyard BT, Moshfegh AJ (2003). Effectiveness of the US Department of Agriculture 5-step multiple-pass method in assessing food intake in obese and nonobese women. Am J Clin Nutr 77, 1171–1178.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Godwin SL, Chambers E, Cleveland L (2004). Accuracy of reporting dietary intake using various portion-size aids in-person and via telephone. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 104, 585–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harnack L, Steffen L, Arnett DK, Gao S, Luepker RV (2004). Accuracy of estimation of large food portions. J Am Diet Assoc 104, 804–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill RJ, Davies PS (2001). The validity of self-reported energy intake as determined using the doubly labelled water technique. Br J Nutr 85, 415–430.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kipnis V, Midthune D, Freedman LS, Bingham S, Schatzkin A, Subar A et al. (2001). Empirical evidence of correlated biases in dietary assessment instruments and its implications. Am J Epidemiol 153, 394–403.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kipnis V, Subar AF, Midthune D, Freedman LS, Ballard-Barbash R, Troiano RP et al. (2003). Structure of dietary measurement error: results of the OPEN biomarker study. Am J Epidemiol 158, 14–21; discussion 22–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krebs-Smith SM, Graubard BI, Kahle LL, Subar AF, Cleveland LE, Ballard-Barbash R (2000). Low energy reporters vs others: a comparison of reported food intakes. Eur J Clin Nutr 54, 281–287.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lansky D, Brownell KD (1982). Estimates of food quantity and calories: errors in self-report among obese patients. Am J Clin Nutr 35, 727–732.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Novotny JA, Rumpler WV, Riddick H, Hebert JR, Rhodes D, Judd JT et al. (2003). Personality characteristics as predictors of underreporting of energy intake on 24-h dietary recall interviews. J Am Diet Assoc 103, 1146–1151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul DR, Rhodes DG, Kramer M, Baer DJ, Rumpler WV (2005). Validation of a food frequency questionnaire by direct measurement of habitual ad libitum food intake. Am J Epidemiol 162, 806–814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumpler WV, Kramer M, Rhodes DG, Paul DR (2006). The impact of the covert manipulation of macronutrient intake on energy intake and the variability in daily food intake in nonobese men. Int J O (2005) 30, 774–781.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Searle S, Casella G, McCulloch CE (1992). Variance Components. John Wiley and Sons: New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Subar AF, Kipnis V, Troiano RP, Midthune D, Schoeller DA, Bingham S et al. (2003). Using intake biomarkers to evaluate the extent of dietary misreporting in a large sample of adults: the OPEN study. Am J Epidemiol 158, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trabulsi J, Schoeller DA (2001). Evaluation of dietary assessment instruments against doubly labeled water, a biomarker of habitual energy intake. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 281, E891–E899.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Agriculture ARS (2002). USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 15. In:U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC. Nutrient Data Laboratory Home Page, http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp.

  • Weber J, Reid P, Greaves K, DeLany J, Standford V, Going S et al. (2001). Validity of self-reported energy intake in lean and obese young women, using two nutrient databases, compared with total energy expenditure by doubly labeled water. Eur J Clin Nutr 55, 940–950.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W V Rumpler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rumpler, W., Kramer, M., Rhodes, D. et al. Identifying sources of reporting error using measured food intake. Eur J Clin Nutr 62, 544–552 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602742

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602742

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links